Sorry, that was vague. I mean something like a large research project via an independent study with a prof, where you focus on an idea that interests you particularly, or via a departmental honors program...something like that. The way I originally phrased it kind of implies collection of original data and that's not really necessary, and in some disciplines is virtually impossible for undergrads. Anyway, I just meant to suggest something that indicates you've been driven off the beaten track by your own interests and, thereby, gives grad programs some evidence that you'll be a self-motivated junior colleague.
And this is one place wherethe LAC experience is so beneficial in my mind. I'm currently doing a JD/MBA at a top grad schooland while that definetly was the baseline for my ability to garner interviews, I definetly felt like the alumni network i still can link was a great help. Equally important, but hard to quantify is the connections that its gotten me i terms of political/social networks that I am just starting to build. On a larger note, this sort of brings the thread back to the original point- the various quality of eductions that you could recieve is a key issue in choosing colleges, but name value and alumni networks are equally important and with the exception of some of the Ivy schools (and even here I think the best LACs trump even HYP) the alumni bases are extremly powerful. I don't know how strong St. John's is simply because I always had the impression that their grads were extremly academicly oriented as opposed to professional careers. However, the Williams, Amherst, Davidons, etc. of the world have the tightest alumni networks I have ever ran into.
It turns out that the former pastor at our church is the chair of the alumni chapter for St. John's in the Austin/San Antonio area.
gotta disagree with this if only to stick up for my old school. Halfway through my time at undergrad we got a new president who was convinced that the route to higher prestige was to make our profs publish much more. So I got to see both sides of this as the new hires were brought in with this emphasis and knew that their tenure chances were dependent on this. As a result they were-on average- far less approachable than some of the older profs. Now with the other system you do get some "characters" who might be better suited to teaching at a boarding school, but at least at my school which had changed drastically in the two decades of co-education they were clearly the last holdouts maintained by the tenure system. In general, the profs who I was and remain closest to published some and were professionally active but were absolutely committed to teaching as their first priority. As a result, they were not the leeading lights in their fields, but they helped make me the person I am today- and to refer back to an earlier post, those profs provide I point of continuity with guys twenty years older than me who were similarily influenced by the same people.
Always nice, but don't over value this sort of link- still if they take alumni recs it might be an edge if you end up on the bubble for the admissions people.